As a charitivist, I have to watch my language. Different communities view the same words in different ways. Different social media platforms can also be defined as different communities. For example, the word ‘revolution’ on X is standard; not so much on LinkedIn, where I would use ‘revolutionary change’ to communicate the very same thing, or at least, a very similar thing.
The charitivist straddles activism and the charitable sector, and as such needs to use language and messaging which either suits both camps, or can be subtly adjusted to suit both camps, even if the core message becomes altered slightly. Small alterations to the core message of a charitivist need not be a big deal. It could be the difference between the phrases ‘capitalism is unsustainable’ and ‘capitalism must be dismantled’. Both phrases can ultimately inspire the same spectrum of actions, especially when the established authority of a non-profit institution or group can be used to draw attention to the appropriateness of much so-called ‘edgy’ activism, extending to civil disobedience and other forms of direct action. But if non-profits want to keep their government funding and other state benefits, as well as their authority with parts of the population that are not comfortable with ‘activism’ as such, they would be well-advised to avoid ‘loaded’ activist terms like ‘revolution’, ‘anti-capitalism’, ‘anarchism’ etc. This could be the best way for them, from their strategic positions, to help revolutionaries, anti-capitalists, and anarchists.
So this is what I have realised, after posting on LinkedIn all week about a very edgy, charitivist book being published by Arkbound Foundation, the UK-based publishing charity I work for. The fundraiser has had a slow start, so please support it by donating or sharing the campaign: https://crowdbound.org/product/ecological-crisis-collapse-revolution-diverse-global-perspectives/
